Miguel Díaz-Canel asserted that the Communist Party of Cuba (PCC) does not operate as an electoral organization, and he openly reiterated its role in the country.
“In Cuba, the Communist Party is not an electoral party. It is not dedicated to elections. It is a party to guide the Revolution, but it is not an electoral party,” stated Díaz-Canel during an interview with journalist Mónica Bergamo published this weekend by the Brazilian newspaper Folha de São Paulo.
The statement summarizes one of the main features of the Cuban political system. The regime claims that the PCC does not present candidates as a party nor competes in elections, yet at the same time, it reserves for itself the superior role within the political structure of the Republic of Cuba.
Díaz-Canel precisely used that distinction to reject Bergamo's criticisms regarding the absence of party pluralism in the country.
The ruler insisted that Cuba does not need candidates to be proposed by political parties, because that role belongs to the people themselves, the citizens, and social organizations. "They are not proposed by parties; they are proposed by the people, by the organizations of Cuban civil society," he asserted.
The ruler intends to present the Cuban elections as independent from the PCC, while simultaneously acknowledging that the only party legally positioned at the top of the system has the political mission to "lead the Revolution."
It is not the first time Díaz-Canel has used that argument. In September 2018, he also stated that “the Communist Party of Cuba is not an electoral party, it is a party of Revolution.”
The thesis allows the regime to argue that the PCC does not formally participate in elections in the same way that parties do in multiparty democracies. However, this lack of party competition also means that no alternative political organization can challenge the Communist Party's leadership of the country.
A party that does not compete to govern, but leads the country
Díaz-Canel openly defended the existence of a single party. "Here there is only one party, but it aims to represent all the interests of the Cuban people," he said.
He rejected the idea that multipartyism is a necessary condition for democracy and urged his interlocutors to not be "deceived" by that perception.
The PCC does not need to behave like an electoral party precisely because there is no other party authorized to compete with it for the political direction of the State. Díaz-Canel defended this situation by appealing to "historical reasons" and stated that the regime will not allow an organization that represents interests other than those of the Revolution.
"We would not accept a party that represents the interests of the United States in Cuba for historical reasons," he said.
The answer, however, does not explain why a political alternative organized by Cubans and with a program different from the communist one should necessarily represent Washington.
Díaz-Canel insisted that the Cuban system is democratic because the deputies go through electoral processes, and it is they who subsequently elect the president of the Republic.
The controversy does not solely revolve around whether that presidential election is direct or indirect. The fundamental question is whether citizens have a real opportunity to replace, through the ballot box, the political group currently governing the country with another organized project also led by Cubans, but opposing the Communist Party.
On this point, Díaz-Canel's explanation was revealing for those who have doubts about the nature of the political system governing Cuba: the PCC is not here to compete electorally for power, but "to lead the Revolution."
Filed under: